(* This is a provisional translation by an external company for reference purpose only. The original text is in Japanese.)

Press Conference by Minister for Foreign Affairs Masahiko Koumura

Date: Wednesday, October 3, 2007, 8:52 p.m.
Place: Front Entrance, Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Main topic:

The Six-Party Talks

1. The Six-Party Talks

Minister:
We received a report from the Chinese side that the documents have been adopted at the Six-Party Talks. It appears that final adjustments were made right up until the very end but I do believe that Japan can highly evaluate the results. As a result of this agreement North Korea will submit reports on all of its nuclear programs by the end of December and will disable all of its nuclear facilities. Based on this premise the three nuclear facilities at Yongbyon will be disabled by the end of December, and so it appears that the final result is in fact better for Japan than the situation in the midway of the talks.

Of course these are the decisions that have been made but what is most important is for the North Korean side to abide by the promises it has made. Japan intends to cooperate with all of the concerned nations and carefully watch to see that North Korea does indeed implement its obligations as promised.

Question:
There was no specific indication in the documents as to a deadline for removing North Korea from the list of nations sponsoring terrorism. What are your thoughts on that?

Minister:
From the outset this is a matter that was more or less agreed upon between the United States and North Korea, but I believe that the fact that no deadline was specified is indicative that the position of Japan was given consideration.

Question:
The Japanese side has insisted that it can be removed from the list under the premise that the abduction issue must be resolved. In the documents it is stipulated that the United States will fulfill its commitments to North Korea in parallel with North Korea's actions. Even still, can you say that consideration has been given to resolving the abduction issue?

Minister:
My understanding is that yes, indeed, a certain degree of consideration was given and that is why no specific deadline was set.

Question:
Regarding energy assistance, the documents stipulate the equivalent of one million tons of heavy fuel oil. Is there really no change to the policy that Japan will not participate in the assistance unless the abduction issue is progressed?

Minister:
There will be no change in Japan's policies. Still, it is not the case that the same obligations apply to all of the five nations involved.

Question:
Regarding the removal of North Korea from the list of nations sponsoring terrorism, the documents stipulate that the basis for this will be the reaching of a consensus in the United States-North Korea Working Group. Is it your understanding that the consensus is that as long as North Korea implements disablement and provides a complete and correct declaration by the end of the year, it will be removed from that list?

Minister:
As I said, there is no specific deadline. Everything is undertaken on the basis of "action for action." Since this is a promise between the United States and North Korea, it will be undertaken by those two parties as they watch the situation as it develops. In those circumstances, naturally I believe that the United States will give a certain degree of consideration to Japan's position. In fact I believe that it is precisely because the United States gave consideration to Japan's position that no deadline was set.

Question:
The documents include specific stipulations for concrete actions in Japan-North Korea relations. Exactly what is meant by that?

Minister:
In referring to specific actions we are clearly talking about the issues that have prevailed until now and making sure that each side does what must be done. Specifically from the North Korean side this means settling the nuclear, missile and abduction issues. And once that has taken place, Japan for its part will settle past issues and move toward normalization of relations.

Question:
Regarding disablement of nuclear facilities, the United States will be bearing the burden for the initial requisite costs. However, does Japan have any intention to bear the burden of the cost of disablement facilities beyond the initial three ones?

Minister:
In the future we will continue to coordinate to determine the respective roles to be played by the five parties regarding cost sharing and activities to disable the nuclear facilities.

Question:
Regarding the reporting of nuclear programs, the documents stipulate the language that "all" will be conducted. What is your understanding as to whether or not this includes such items as the uranium enrichment plans?

Minister:
The stipulation is for reporting to be made on everything and therefore North Korea is obliged to make reports on everything. We intend to pay careful attention to whether or not North Korea will actually do that and I believe that it is necessary for all of the concerned nations to pay close attention to ensure that North Korea does this.

Question:
Although agreement has been reached, what about the sanctions Japan has imposed? Now it seems that the consensus is to extend those sanctions, but do you see any moves coming out toward relaxing those sanctions?

Minister:
I do not imagine that there will be any immediate move in that direction. I believe that we have to wait a little bit longer and see what actual actions take place.

Question:
Can we understand that we might see the lifting of sanctions if all of the necessary actions do take place?

Minister:
Naturally, that could happen if action occurs on the nuclear, missile and abduction issues. It is absolutely not imaginable that our sanctions would be carried on forward forever even if North Korea changed its stance.

Question:
In the documents it is clearly stipulated that all nuclear programs will be covered. Is it correct to understand that this includes nuclear weapons that have already been developed?

Minister:
That is a point which is not really clear from the current language. However, as we move forward with denuclearization we will also need to push for that.

Back to Index